Ecaton Posted January 4, 2016 Share #41 Posted January 4, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) The A7Rii with the 55/1.8 & the Batis 85/1.8 make a very nice travel kit in partnership with the Q. In this case I`d rather replace the Q with a Batis 25, saving weight and cost and avoiding the complexity of two very different UI and having to PP quite different files. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 Hi Ecaton, Take a look here Complementary travel camera along with the Q. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Mr.Q Posted January 4, 2016 Share #42 Posted January 4, 2016 In this case I`d rather replace the Q with a Batis 25, saving weight and cost and avoiding the complexity of two very different UI and having to PP quite different files. That is a good point, but doesn't that hold true with all the cameras mentioned so far? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted January 4, 2016 Share #43 Posted January 4, 2016 That is a good point, but doesn't that hold true with all the cameras mentioned so far? I think the question is which camera complements the Q best, with the assumption that the Q will play the lead role. If a FF system is added, why then not simply adding a 24-28mm prime to the system body. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted January 4, 2016 Share #44 Posted January 4, 2016 I think the question is which camera complements the Q best, with the assumption that the Q will play the lead role. If a FF system is added, why then not simply adding a 24-28mm prime to the system body. For me, it's because 1) I'm primarily a 28-35mm shooter so the Q stays in my bag 365 days a year. 2) It's quicker and less cumbersome to swap bodies over swapping lenses out in the field. 3) I do not want to compromise IQ even in the rare instances I shoot portraiture or landscapes 4) Sony's aren't pleasurable to shoot with, but I consider them the jack-of-all-trades --- just as small as any other ILC APS-C camera with better IQ and all important features packed in. It's perfect as a complimentary camera. Similar to how well a Range Rover compliments a Porsche. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
@McLeica Posted January 4, 2016 Share #45 Posted January 4, 2016 We'll see... Lytro was technically amazing as well. But conceptually the L16 appears to be very well thought out. Their samples are too small to really judge quality though. Let's see if Silicon Valley can actually produce a camera that photographers want. Edit: See also http://joshanon.com/blog/2015/10/07/the_light_l16 Yup, agreed. Really interesting step into the future, but the images are, at the moment, a tad underwhelming. The colours and IQ still look like they need a lot of work. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
millsart Posted January 4, 2016 Share #46 Posted January 4, 2016 I suppose the question comes down to budget as much as anything. Even if Leica did actually produce a true 50mm, or 75mm, Q variant as well, would it be be a viable 2nd body for everyone ? Why limit oneself to just one $4250 camera when you can carry a second one as well, and gain the benefits of having the same control interface, the file output etc. Problem solved right ? For some users sure, but I think a lot of shooters can maybe justify the Q because its a primary focal length, but for other less used focal lengths they can't/won't invest so much money. I personally sold my A7rII kit for the Q, giving up quite a number of lenses to put the money instead into one focal length I like, and a camera I really enjoy shooting. It wasn't just me going, "oh, I like 28mm FoV, I think on a whim I'll go and swap this $449 Sony 28/2 FE lens for a $4250 Q". Instead it was me thinking, okay, I like this focal length and primarily shoot it most of the time, and the Q handing/speed I would enjoy...what do I have to sell, in addition to my 28/2 FE lens to afford it ? Answer was selling all my Sony kit, for reasons of budget, but also not wanting to make by camera bag even heavier by replacing a 200 gram 28mm lens with a 600 gram 2nd camera. So for me anyways, perhaps like some others here, the question comes down to meeting two main points; 1 - Given I sunk a ton of money into the Q, what is something that isn't going to break the bank, especially considering I'm only going to be shooting it a minimum amount of time, and 2 - What is something that isn't too big and heavy, because again, I'm not going to be shooting it much and don't want to haul around too much weight. For me, something like a A6000 makes the most sense compared a A7rII. $400 vs $3200, big savings in size/weight, and still "good enough" image quality and handling that I think rather exceeds its price point of $398. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iduna Posted January 4, 2016 Share #47 Posted January 4, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Iduna i agree that a 2nd camera is the only insurance against most risks and I always have one on the trip.(cameras and their accessories packed and consigned separately! ). However, in the street, at very hot locations, a backpack is a complete nuisance, (try Indian cities) and my back will no longer allow me to walk for 4-6 hours with two bodies and perhaps 3 lenses. I leave one kit in my hotel safe. This is one of the considerations for many of us who suffer as we get older. Another factor for me is the desire to reduce the number of different formats of files I generate and the different charging systems and lens accessories. So I try to keep things standardised. DNG files. I didn't find that I could do everything with my Q, but I accepted the compromise of weight versus focal length and would have returned to a location with my M + 75mm if it was worthwhile. That said, I am still impressed with my M9 and the great lenses. I have to make the Q work for me. Over the years I have demonstrated to myself that carrying every lens for any eventuality each day didn't result in a more successful day. I plan the type of shoot and equip accordingly. I've sold all my M42, MFT, LTM, cameras, lenses, and Olympus, panasonic and Canon adaptors and rented out the room space! Have fun... Gordon, Ecaton yes, I can very well understand why people bought the "Q", I also considered the weight aspect. It is a very versatile camera, so one can cover with it almost everything. If you are looking for a second Leica Body a "T" would be a good choice. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucerne Posted January 4, 2016 Share #48 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) Gordon, Ecaton yes, I can very well understand why people bought the "Q", I also considered the weight aspect. It is a very versatile camera, so one can cover with it almost everything. If you are looking for a second Leica Body a "T" would be a good choice. Iduna. Happy new year. I think your idea of using the T is well worth considering. Those of us who are already owners of substantial value in Leica kit need to find a compromise while sticking to a single manufacturer. I have the Q plus an M9 + a range of Leica glass from 21mm to 90mm and that includes 3 X 50mm. I find the M9 plus lenses plus the Q is just too much physically for international travel. The Q plus T plus an M adaptor might just be a better idea. I'm going to see what sort of a deal I could get by reducing my lens stock. I'm still in love with the M9-P rendering but I'm afraid I might lose the inclination to take more time over composition with my rangefinder if I succumb to what others might call "later technology". Many new users have skipped that experience and might not be aware of what that type of shooting the rangefinder entails - or what results can be produced. Reading the forum since the appearance of the Q seems to reveal many new users who are first time with Leica and they don't have any existing investment in Leica glass. Hence the ideas of less expensive -non Leica - bodies as complementary kit seems reasonable. Maybe it is, but to me, that's ultimately messy and I know that it can lead to being unsatisfied and then further purchases. Regards Edited January 4, 2016 by lucerne 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted January 4, 2016 Share #49 Posted January 4, 2016 Leica Q, Sony a7rII with Zeiss Loxia 50/2 (or FE55/1.8) and Loxia 21/2.8 (or CV15/4.5 MkIII) all fit into a Billingham Hadley small. Recently went to Italy with this setup 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
illuminatix Posted January 4, 2016 Share #50 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) In this case I`d rather replace the Q with a Batis 25, saving weight and cost and avoiding the complexity of two very different UI and having to PP quite different files. The Q is delightful to use... there's an immediacy and simplicity that creates joy in the moment. I look forward to using it, I like it around me at all times. And it produces beautiful photos that give me happiness. The Q is a work of art designed to produce works of art. If I could only use one camera, the Q is it. The photos that the A7Rii produces are incredible... but I have to manage a thousand factors that need to be tuned and balanced and jiggered. I am convinced that the menu system is a sophisticated troll. So the end result is wonderful, but the process isn't enjoyable. It's a scientific tool designed to produce immaculate research results using comprehensive if complex control structures. There are moments I have it mostly figured out and in those moments there's a thrill to doing complex work well - but then I wonder... does it have to be like this? Perhaps so, but it isn't delightful. So... the Q is primary because it produces wonderful images in a simple and delightful way. The A7Rii is secondary because it produces wonderful images in a cluttered and complex way. For now, of course. Edited January 4, 2016 by illuminatix 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted January 4, 2016 Share #51 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) I have recently been using a rather unusual second camera to give me the ability to cover 28mm-90mm - a Sigma DP3M. This is a photograph of my old 'Nikon' crumpler photo bag with both items in it. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! The Q gives me the equivalent of 28-35-50 and the DP3M gives me 75-90 and even 135mm at a significant crop. The rather odd looking item on top of the DP3M is a Hoodman loupe so I can 'sort-of' use it as if it has a viewfinder. The Sigma cameras are known for the high quality IQ at low iso rivalling that of MF cameras. They are sharp down to the pixel level which few other cameras can rival - although I have been pleasantly surprised at how sharp the Q is for a Bayer sensor. Just my two cents. LouisB Edited January 4, 2016 by biglouis 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! The Q gives me the equivalent of 28-35-50 and the DP3M gives me 75-90 and even 135mm at a significant crop. The rather odd looking item on top of the DP3M is a Hoodman loupe so I can 'sort-of' use it as if it has a viewfinder. The Sigma cameras are known for the high quality IQ at low iso rivalling that of MF cameras. They are sharp down to the pixel level which few other cameras can rival - although I have been pleasantly surprised at how sharp the Q is for a Bayer sensor. Just my two cents. LouisB ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254941-complementary-travel-camera-along-with-the-q/?do=findComment&comment=2962005'>More sharing options...
jlindstrom Posted January 5, 2016 Share #52 Posted January 5, 2016 My travel companion for Q is the Leica X Vario with grip & evf. Despite some useability quirks the images it produces especially daytime are fantastic. So daytime walking around and about I'll take the vario and evening or when a zoom is not needed, I'll take the Q. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
40mm f/2 Posted January 5, 2016 Share #53 Posted January 5, 2016 I have recently been using a rather unusual second camera to give me the ability to cover 28mm-90mm - a Sigma DP3M. This is a photograph of my old 'Nikon' crumpler photo bag with both items in it. 20151219_123423.jpg The Q gives me the equivalent of 28-35-50 and the DP3M gives me 75-90 and even 135mm at a significant crop. The rather odd looking item on top of the DP3M is a Hoodman loupe so I can 'sort-of' use it as if it has a viewfinder. The Sigma cameras are known for the high quality IQ at low iso rivalling that of MF cameras. They are sharp down to the pixel level which few other cameras can rival - although I have been pleasantly surprised at how sharp the Q is for a Bayer sensor. Just my two cents. LouisB I used the same setup which except my bag is a waterproof messenger bag from Outdoor Research with a DIY insert with microfiber cloth. I find it easier to have 2 smaller cameras than one camera with multiple lenses. I hate cleaning sensors (especially on my M9) and changing lenses is slower than changing cameras. But I would like to replace the DP3M. First it is very slow and It is very easy to touch some buttons which completely changes the settings (like +3EV exposure compensation with out being aware of that fact). This happens to me quite often with the Sigma and makes one really appreciate the handling of the Q Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254941-complementary-travel-camera-along-with-the-q/?do=findComment&comment=2962814'>More sharing options...
Guest VVJ Posted January 6, 2016 Share #54 Posted January 6, 2016 (edited) I typically carry both the Leica T with zoom lens and the Leica Q. Edited January 6, 2016 by JorisV 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
millsart Posted January 6, 2016 Share #55 Posted January 6, 2016 (edited) I ended up going with the GM5 paired with the 42.5/1.7 as a complement camera for short tele needs. Darn if it doesn't look a bit like a mini Q with its black faux leather grip, EVF in the top left corner, f1.7 lens etc. Given its a Panasonic even the AF speed and touch LCD feels familiar LOL Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Thought about a LX100 but really there isn't much point when you think about...its got a 24mm equiv and the Q is about what, 26mm uncorrected, so would I shoot the LX100 on the wide end much ? No. Furthermore, does it really offer anything special around 50mm equiv ? Not really because its something like a 26mm/2.8 actual focal length on a 12meg m4/3 (slightly smaller than m4/3 I think) sensor. Whats the Q with the 50mm framing ? A 28mm f1.7 lens, with a 1.8x crop giving an 8meg file, so not a world of difference. Its only when your trying to get up past 75mm equiv FoV does the Q run out of pixels for cropping, at least with regards to m4/3 options. So Q for 28/35/50 and then the GM5 for a 85mm equiv is the plan. Also might add one of those little fisheye body caps just for an ultra wide option Edited January 6, 2016 by millsart 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Thought about a LX100 but really there isn't much point when you think about...its got a 24mm equiv and the Q is about what, 26mm uncorrected, so would I shoot the LX100 on the wide end much ? No. Furthermore, does it really offer anything special around 50mm equiv ? Not really because its something like a 26mm/2.8 actual focal length on a 12meg m4/3 (slightly smaller than m4/3 I think) sensor. Whats the Q with the 50mm framing ? A 28mm f1.7 lens, with a 1.8x crop giving an 8meg file, so not a world of difference. Its only when your trying to get up past 75mm equiv FoV does the Q run out of pixels for cropping, at least with regards to m4/3 options. So Q for 28/35/50 and then the GM5 for a 85mm equiv is the plan. Also might add one of those little fisheye body caps just for an ultra wide option ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254941-complementary-travel-camera-along-with-the-q/?do=findComment&comment=2963070'>More sharing options...
Tony_K Posted January 6, 2016 Share #56 Posted January 6, 2016 My ricoh gr backs up the Q and gets used when I want something pocketable. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted January 6, 2016 Share #57 Posted January 6, 2016 (edited) My ricoh gr backs up the Q and gets used when I want something pocketable. Much as I feared I have not used my Ricoh GR at all since getting the Q. However, it is too good a camera to sell. But it is a natural backup if you want to keep the same 28mm perspective. I would use it if I wanted a 21mm perspective along with the Q (using the WA adapter). LouisB Edited January 6, 2016 by biglouis 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KariP Posted January 10, 2016 Share #58 Posted January 10, 2016 Hi, my own choice is Q paired with M(240) with Summilux 50mm (f 1.4 for the creamy bokeh), Super Elmar 18mm (for the superWA) and depending on what to shoot (travel, portrait...) either Summicron 90mm or Olympus E-M1 + 40-150mm f 2.8 (80-300 equivalent) or 75mm f 1.8 (150mm eq). Depending on how much I want to carry / how different photographic situations are to be expected. Consider one M body with 75mm 1.4 or Olympus E-M1 or 5 with autofocus tele lenses like 45mm f 1.8, 75mm f 1.8 or panaleica 42.5mm f 1.2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donberghof Posted January 10, 2016 Share #59 Posted January 10, 2016 (edited) Over the past few years I have been using a Nikon D800 with a variety of lenses covering 24-200mm but hated to lug it along on trips. Most of my photography is as serious hobbyist and I do a lot of hiking and walking and in general I felt that over time, more often then not I would mostly keep my 50mm lens mounted because it was easier. In 2014 I purchased the D-lux (type 109) and very much liked the experience. We spend 2weeks in NZ and even though I had brought my D800 as well, it stayed mostly in the bag as the D-Lux was fun and versatile with phenomenal results on picture quality. I realized that for my purposes, having one camera on me 100% of the time, works well. When I returned from the trip I sold all the Nikon equipment. In November I purchased the Q and just came back from my first trip abroad. Totally fell in love with the Q and clearly superior to the D-lux on many fronts, as you should expect for the cost differential. I was pleasantly surprised that I missed the zoom/focal range less than thought I would. Sure, I missed some portrait shots when I could not move closer to the subject, but it was a rarity. I also feel that cropping in Lightroom is effective and shoot 100% of my pictures in 28mm mode. If I'd go on Safari I would definitely not rely on the Q alone but I'd rent a camera with 400mm lens and suspect that my Q will be my go to camera for everything other then long distance shots. Edited January 10, 2016 by Donberghof Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
millsart Posted January 10, 2016 Share #60 Posted January 10, 2016 In November I purchased the Q and just came back from my first trip abroad. Totally fell in love with the Q and clearly superior to the D-lux on many fronts, as you should expect for the cost differential. I was pleasantly surprised that I missed the zoom/focal range less than thought I would. Sure, I missed some portrait shots when I could not move closer to the subject, but it was a rarity. I think there can be a certain freedom when one doesn't have a bag of lens/different focal length cameras with them, it that it means you don't have to get every shot. When I've got, say a wide angle and a tele with me, it means (in my mind at least) that I need to try to maximize every image on a location. I need to get the wide angle shots, while also trying to grab every portrait and isolated scene I can find. I'm shooting stuff 3 different ways, going for the wide environmental portrait, and then trying to also shoot it tight etc. That is fine and good of course, but it can feel like a lot of work at times too. Sometimes perhaps its nice to walk around with just a 28mm and simply say "well, I don't have a 70-200/2.8 with me, so I'm not going to worry about shooting tight shots". Just look for what you can do with the gear you've got, and try to produce the best images possible with what you've got to work with. At the very least, its nice to come home from a long trip with 1/3rd the images to have to work editing! 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.